Mohit Satodiya1, Navneet Takkar1, Poonam Goel1, Jasbinder Kaur2. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Govt. Medical College and Hospital, D Block, Level IV, GMCH, Sector 32, Chandigarh, 160030 India. 2. Department of Biochemistry, Govt. Medical College and Hospital, Chandigarh, 160030 India.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the incidence, maternal and fetal outcomes of gestational diabetes mellitus using one step versus two steps as a screening procedure. METHODOLOGY: A prospective randomized trial involving screening of 1000 pregnant women for gestational diabetes mellitus was conducted. Women were divided in two groups (500 each). Group A comprised of patients screened with two-step approach (ACOG recommendation), and group B comprised of women screened by one-step method (IADPSG criteria). Women diagnosed with 'gestational diabetes' were followed in an antenatal clinic, and incidence of GDM and maternal and fetal outcome between two groups were analyzed using SPSS. RESULTS: The incidence of GDM was almost double using one-step versus two-step approach which was 19.2 and 11.8%, respectively. Maternal outcomes were comparable in both the groups except the risk of preterm delivery which was 2.5 times more in group A than group B (odds ratio = 2.43 95% CI 1.01-5.79). Further, fetal outcomes were also comparable except neonatal hypoglycemia which was seen in 29.31% in group A versus 7.4% in group B. In the group B, 15 patients (15.8%) with GDM (based on FBS ≥ 92 mg/dl at first ANC visit) showed clinical symptoms and blood sugars in hypoglycemic range on MNT requiring resumption of normal diet. CONCLUSION: The incidence of GDM using IADPSG criteria was almost double versus ACOG criteria. Maternal and fetal outcomes were comparable except in 15.8% women diagnosed as GDM (using FBS ≥ 92 mg/dl at first ANC visit as per IADPSG) and suffered from hypoglycemia. A large trial is being proposed before these criteria are adopted.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the incidence, maternal and fetal outcomes of gestational diabetes mellitus using one step versus two steps as a screening procedure. METHODOLOGY: A prospective randomized trial involving screening of 1000 pregnant women for gestational diabetes mellitus was conducted. Women were divided in two groups (500 each). Group A comprised of patients screened with two-step approach (ACOG recommendation), and group B comprised of women screened by one-step method (IADPSG criteria). Women diagnosed with 'gestational diabetes' were followed in an antenatal clinic, and incidence of GDM and maternal and fetal outcome between two groups were analyzed using SPSS. RESULTS: The incidence of GDM was almost double using one-step versus two-step approach which was 19.2 and 11.8%, respectively. Maternal outcomes were comparable in both the groups except the risk of preterm delivery which was 2.5 times more in group A than group B (odds ratio = 2.43 95% CI 1.01-5.79). Further, fetal outcomes were also comparable except neonatal hypoglycemia which was seen in 29.31% in group A versus 7.4% in group B. In the group B, 15 patients (15.8%) with GDM (based on FBS ≥ 92 mg/dl at first ANC visit) showed clinical symptoms and blood sugars in hypoglycemic range on MNT requiring resumption of normal diet. CONCLUSION: The incidence of GDM using IADPSG criteria was almost double versus ACOG criteria. Maternal and fetal outcomes were comparable except in 15.8% women diagnosed as GDM (using FBS ≥ 92 mg/dl at first ANC visit as per IADPSG) and suffered from hypoglycemia. A large trial is being proposed before these criteria are adopted.
Entities:
Keywords:
ACOG; Gestational diabetes mellitus; HAPO study; IADPSG
Authors: V Seshiah; B K Sahay; A K Das; Siddharth Shah; Samar Banerjee; P V Rao; A Ammini; V Balaji; Sunil Gupta; Hema Divakar; Sujata Misra; Uday Thanawala Journal: J Indian Med Assoc Date: 2009-11
Authors: Boyd E Metzger; Steven G Gabbe; Bengt Persson; Thomas A Buchanan; Patrick A Catalano; Peter Damm; Alan R Dyer; Alberto de Leiva; Moshe Hod; John L Kitzmiler; Lynn P Lowe; H David McIntyre; Jeremy J N Oats; Yasue Omori; Maria Ines Schmidt Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 17.152
Authors: Boyd E Metzger; Lynn P Lowe; Alan R Dyer; Elisabeth R Trimble; Udom Chaovarindr; Donald R Coustan; David R Hadden; David R McCance; Moshe Hod; Harold David McIntyre; Jeremy J N Oats; Bengt Persson; Michael S Rogers; David A Sacks Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-05-08 Impact factor: 91.245